HC Deb 18 February 1981 vol 999 cc266-7
Mr. Chapman

asked the Lord Privy Seal if he will make a statement on any progress made at the re-convened Madrid conference set up to review the Helsinki agreements.

Mr. Edward Lyons

asked the Lord Privy Seal what further steps he proposes to take to encourage observance of the provisions of the Helsinki accord.

Mr. Blaker

At Madrid, we and our partners in the European Community have tabled proposals seeking commitments from participating States on human rights, European security, freedom of movement, information and family reunification. I hope that it will be possible to reach agreement on these and a limited number of other substantive measures of benefit to all.

Mr. Chapman

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that reply. Is it still the intention of Her Majesty's Government that the human rights issues, such as civil freedoms and the freedom of a citizen to leave a country, are to be linked to any matters concerning arms control or disarmament? Relevant to that, are the Russian Government still insisting upon the agreement for a disarmament conference as a precondition for any further review conference?

Mr. Blaker

There is no direct link between the various matters mentioned by my hon. Friend. However, we believe that it would be right that progress should be made in all the baskets—on human rights, trade, family reunification and security. The Russians are still sticking to their proposal for a conference on detente and disarmament, but at present they are not linking that to a refusal to attend a further, follow-up conference. They are committed to a further conference by the arrangements made at the beginning of the Madrid conference.

Mr. Edward Lyons

Does the Minister agree that an additional step that could be taken would be for British Ministers to harp persistently on the necessity to release members of the Soviet monitoring committee of the Helsinki agreement, including Professor Orlov? Does he not agree that the Russians should be incessantly reminded that when campaigners for human rights can speak at liberty, there will be a great improvement in international relations?

Mr. Blaker

I agree with what the hon. and learned Gentleman has said. We have taken the lead in talking about that subject. One of the proposals of which we are joint sponsors relates to that matter.

Sir Bernard Braine

Is my hon. Friend aware that at this moment Vaclav Havel, an internationally respected playwright, and others are in prison in Czechoslovakia for doing no more than criticising their Government for not observing the spirit and letter of the Helsinki accord, which that Government signed? What justification can there be for engaging in talks in Madrid, in the face of such contemptuous defiance of the Helsinki accord by Moscow's puppets?

Mr. Blaker

I endorse what my hon. Friend has said. I know of the personal interest which he has taken in the important case of Vaclav Havel and of the efforts he has made, in conjunction with a number of distinguished people to draw that case to the attention of the world. We have expressly proposed at Madrid that there should be a new agreement, reaffirming the right of people to monitor the performance by their Government of the obligations which they assumed at Helsinki.

Mr. McNally

Will the Minister take this opportunity, which he missed in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Salford, East (Mr. Allaun), to confirm that the Government want SALT II to be ratified and want us to move on to a SALT III agreement?

Mr. Blaker

We have not changed our position.

Mr. David Atkinson

Does my hon. Friend agree that the West should not further discuss the possibility of undertaking solemn and binding promises on detente or disarmament until such time as the Soviet Union agrees to implement the original Helsinki accord?

Mr. Blaker

Yes. That is why we take the view that for the Madrid conference to subscribe to declarations that are not binding, such as those which I understand are contemplated in the Polish proposal for a conference on detente and disarmament, would be unrealistic. They would be particularly unrealistic when only just over a year ago the Soviet Union, in breach of its obligations under the United Nations charter, invaded Afghanistan.